Effects of collaborative consultation using iPad application in school‐based occupational therapy: A single‐arm pre‐post pilot study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: This pilot study examined the effect of collaborative consultation with teachers in school-based occupational therapy (SBOT) using iPad application for goal-setting-Aid for Decision-Making in Occupation Choice for School (ADOC-S). METHOD: A single arm pre-post intervention design was conducted at four preschools in Japan. The participants were 10 preschool teachers (10.5 ± 0.4 years of teaching), and 10 children (3.8 ± 0.4 years old; five boys). The teachers received three collaborative consultations (1 hr for each) from one occupational therapist. Firstly, the occupational therapist conducted an observational assessment of the child's school life, then the teacher and occupational therapist identified occupation-based goals for each child using the ADOC-S. Secondly, the teacher and the occupational therapist developed the graded goals using the Goal Attainment Scale (GAS) and discussed the daily intervention plan for the teachers to conduct. Thirdly, the occupational therapist followed up on the intervention process using GAS. The subjective outcome was measured at 10 point-satisfaction and performance score in each goal using Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM). The observed outcome was measured using GAS and Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ). RESULTS: All the participants including teachers and children successfully underwent the intervention process. Significant improvement was found pre-post and effect size (ES) was large on the COPM (ES; r = .85-.94), GAS (ES; r = .98-.99) and SDQ (ES; r = .64). All goals (30/30) exceeded expectations of GAS from zero to +2. CONCLUSION: Although there are some limitations and considerations which need to be resolved for future studies, our results suggest that ADOC-S would help build a rapport with a teacher in SBOT settings, and this collaborative consultation would facilitate a positive outcome.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".